PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
HMCH.L vs. XCHA.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

HMCH.L vs. XCHA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCH.L) and Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCHA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

HMCH.L is traded in GBp, while XCHA.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the XCHA.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HMCH.L achieves a -7.28% return, which is significantly lower than XCHA.L's 11.89% return. Over the past 10 years, HMCH.L has underperformed XCHA.L with an annualized return of 5.59%, while XCHA.L has yielded a comparatively higher 10.13% annualized return.


HMCH.L

1D
-0.65%
1M
-1.85%
YTD
-7.28%
6M
-8.93%
1Y
5.82%
3Y*
7.83%
5Y*
-4.14%
10Y*
5.59%

XCHA.L

1D
-0.57%
1M
3.21%
YTD
11.89%
6M
14.40%
1Y
43.22%
3Y*
12.61%
5Y*
3.17%
10Y*
10.13%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

HMCH.L vs. XCHA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
HMCH.L
HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF
-7.28%22.87%20.73%-16.33%-13.40%-21.06%24.96%17.80%-14.28%40.24%
XCHA.L
Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C
11.89%20.82%18.05%-15.45%-15.25%4.22%41.57%35.22%-19.79%23.54%

Correlation

The correlation between HMCH.L and XCHA.L is 0.67, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.67

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.71

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.72

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.72

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 18, 2012

0.70

The correlation between HMCH.L and XCHA.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.72 - a consistent structural relationship.

HMCH.L vs. XCHA.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
HMCH.L
XCHA.L

Consumer Cyclical

26.1%
6.5%

Financial Services

19.2%
20.0%

Communication Services

18.4%
1.6%

Technology

10.7%
26.9%

Industrials

5.4%
16.5%

Basic Materials

5.3%
10.3%

Healthcare

5.1%
4.7%

Energy

3.5%
3.0%

Consumer Defensive

3.0%
7.2%

Utilities

1.7%
2.8%

Real Estate

1.7%
0.5%

Consumer Cyclical

HMCH.L
26.1%
XCHA.L
6.5%

Financial Services

HMCH.L
19.2%
XCHA.L
20.0%

Communication Services

HMCH.L
18.4%
XCHA.L
1.6%

Technology

HMCH.L
10.7%
XCHA.L
26.9%

Industrials

HMCH.L
5.4%
XCHA.L
16.5%

Basic Materials

HMCH.L
5.3%
XCHA.L
10.3%

Healthcare

HMCH.L
5.1%
XCHA.L
4.7%

Energy

HMCH.L
3.5%
XCHA.L
3.0%

Consumer Defensive

HMCH.L
3.0%
XCHA.L
7.2%

Utilities

HMCH.L
1.7%
XCHA.L
2.8%

Real Estate

HMCH.L
1.7%
XCHA.L
0.5%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

HMCH.L vs. XCHA.L — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

HMCH.L
HMCH.L Risk / Return Rank: 1313
Overall Rank
HMCH.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
HMCH.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
HMCH.L Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
HMCH.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
HMCH.L Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
Martin Ratio Rank

XCHA.L
XCHA.L Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
XCHA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XCHA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
XCHA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
XCHA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
XCHA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

HMCH.L vs. XCHA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCH.L) and Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCHA.L). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.


HMCH.LXCHA.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.30

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.87

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.47

-0.40

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.34

6.92

-6.58

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.71

19.40

-18.69

HMCH.L vs. XCHA.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HMCH.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.32, which is lower than the XCHA.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HMCH.L and XCHA.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


HMCH.LXCHA.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.32

2.62

-2.30

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.15

0.15

-0.30

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.22

0.45

-0.23

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.16

0.34

-0.17

Drawdowns

HMCH.L vs. XCHA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HMCH.L drawdown since its inception was -56.50%, which is greater than XCHA.L's maximum drawdown of -47.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HMCH.L and XCHA.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


HMCH.LXCHA.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-56.50%

-47.42%

-9.08%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-17.18%

-6.22%

-10.96%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.67%

-24.78%

+0.11%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-49.31%

-36.96%

-12.35%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-56.50%

-39.52%

-16.98%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-32.69%

-1.17%

-31.52%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-20.25%

-18.80%

-1.45%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.17%

2.22%

+5.95%

Volatility

HMCH.L vs. XCHA.L - Volatility Comparison

HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF (HMCH.L) has a higher volatility of 7.06% compared to Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C (XCHA.L) at 5.66%. This indicates that HMCH.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XCHA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


HMCH.LXCHA.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.06%

5.66%

+1.40%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.14%

11.49%

+1.65%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.44%

16.44%

+2.00%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

27.67%

21.49%

+6.18%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

25.21%

22.57%

+2.64%

HMCH.L vs. XCHA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

HMCH.L has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than XCHA.L's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

HMCH.L vs. XCHA.L - Dividend Comparison

HMCH.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.15%, while XCHA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
HMCH.L
HSBC MSCI China UCITS ETF
2.15%2.34%2.17%2.12%1.85%1.28%0.92%1.65%1.36%0.78%1.89%2.84%
XCHA.L
Xtrackers CSI 300 Swap UCITS ETF 1C
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


HMCH.L and XCHA.L have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, HMCH.L is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

HMCH.L is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for XCHA.L.

HMCH.L tracks MSCI China NR USD, while XCHA.L tracks MSCI China A Onshore NR CNY. They also come from different issuers: HSBC and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for HMCH.L and 0.50% for XCHA.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for HMCH.L and XCHA.L

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer